Saturday, February 9, 2013

Kant vs. Utilitarianism


Victoria Murphy
Philosophy
Professor Gilliland
2/3/13
Kant vs. Utilitarianism

    Between Kant and the Utilitarian’s I would choose Kant’s system over the Utilitarian’s or the Greatest Happiness Principle which states that “actions are right in the extent that they promote happiness.” Only when we sacrifice are own happiness. This confuses me considering peoples “own” happiness would obviously not be the same as every other persons. Kant’s believes are more defined as a persons rationality and autonomy. He believes that pain and pleasure define us. Kant also believes that the intention behind an action is what determines whether it is ethical, not the consequences of the action. Promoting rationality and autonomy is more important in a human setting than pleasures. Happiness is based off pleasure and pleasure could be wrong doing to some people. Autonomy is ones moral responsibility. Rationality is being reasonably about life and perceptions. Kant’s systems are self-perfection, and the duty to promote happiness to others. He states “we have a general duty to promote the morally legitimate goals of others”. Kant believes we do not have a moral duty to promote our own happiness since by nature we have happiness as an end and that we are strongly inclined to promote our happiness.
I think if we are born with our own means of self-perfection than we work towards this and receiving happiness from reaching our duties we as people will promote our own happiness since by nature we have happiness as an end and we are strongly inclined to promote our happiness. I think if we are born with our own means of self-perfection than we work towards this and receiving happiness from reaching our duties we as people  will promote self-perfection to others. Like a domino affect. The Utilitarian’s say life is all above happiness and the means of it. I do not believe that human life can not be depicted from happiness. Also Utilitarian’s seem more into the “neighbor” aspect of life. I don’t think people should be self centered but asking people to trust others with their all and take pain for their happiness is a lot to ask out of people who habilitate so many emotions.

All bad choices are immoral
All acts under minding persons are injustice
Therefore all degrading of persons are immoral

3 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You make several good points in this post, but I didn't quite get the pleasure and pain-part. Utilitarianism says we should maximize pleasure and minimize pain, not Kantian ethics.

    The Barbara argument looks wrong, it should be "All M are P. All S are M. Therefore, all S are P". So in this case it would be "All bad choices are immoral. All acts under minding persons are bad choices. Therefore, all acts under minding persons are immoral".

    ReplyDelete
  3. You make valid point in your post like said Mads Larsen said I didn't comprehend the pleasure part of the argument. Also with kantian ethics part was to clear honestly. WIth Barbara argument your basically saying everything is immoral.

    ReplyDelete